Jump to content
Bruininthebay

American Athletic and ESPN do not reach agreement during exclusive negotiations for new TV deal

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Regarding Hawaii, I'm curious. I get the travel problems for your teams but Wyoming managed to deal with that for about two decades in the WAC. As such, I have to wonder why Hawaii shouldn't be allowed to become a full member of the MWC now. Has the resistance been from the schools who were never in the WAC with Hawaii when that conference was at its height in the late seventies to late nineties?

I believe there are some MW members not supportive of the travel being a full member would bring.

Slappy got the gist of it. Although we aren't really struggling financially more than any average school, mostly our current AD wants and school president are being a lot more frugal with funds.

45 minutes ago, slappy said:

Yes.  They are struggling financially and can not send the oly sports.  Distance and $.  We are not really a good fit for them. 

MW travel is a lot worse than BW travel. On top of the travel subsidies difference.

MW doesn't support mens vball while BW does. (it is a money maker for us)

MW women vball is a wash compared to BW. (another money maker for us)

MW baseball is usually worse than BW baseball (another money maker for us)

the sports get to have a close distance of travel, as its only to Cali for conference play.

In regards to Football, we had the fans for independence and fans for joining the MW. The MW fans won out in the end due to conference affiliation, and renewing/keeping old rivalries.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious if ESPN asks the American for a nine game football or 20 game basketball schedule provision similar to the one they have in their contract with the ACC.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17722766/acc-elects-keep-current-football-schedule-format

The decision will cost each school about $500,000 in television revenue, industry sources told ESPN's Brett McMurphy.

With a new TV deal in place with ESPN and the launch of a new ACC Network in the works for 2019, the league expanded its conference schedule for basketball (from 18 to 20 games, starting in 2019), but a move toward more intraconference football games was hotly contested by several schools with annual rivalry games outside the league.

The new ESPN deal gave the schools three options: increase the league schedule to nine games with one nonconference Power 5 opponent; play eight league games with two nonconference Power 5 opponents; or stay at eight league games with one nonconference Power 5 opponent. ACC schools would have received the full amount of the deal between ESPN and the ACC by choosing either of the first two options. But the schools instead chose to remain status quo despite the reduced revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Well, the B1G certainly can't be pleased with how awful Rutgers is at the only sports which matter to TV viewers, football and men's basketball. They also can't be very happy with the paucity of great athletes coming out of NJ. And anybody ever wonder why the hell Rutgers isn't called the University of New Jersey?

Rutgers is an AAU school which participated in the first college football game ever. Nevertheless, it's athletics hell and I therefore think witha"s" (great grammar btw) is correct that although the B1G didn't expect much from adding that school, it expected more than it's been getting.

You couldn’t be more wrong.  A relative of mine is an AD at a P5 school.  I had dinner with him recently and he said the B1G is “overjoyed” at the results of adding Rutgers. The B1G network gets to count every home passed in the tri state area as an “in-network” subscriber to mso’s which more than triples the carriage fee paid by the mso’s in that area.  He estimated that and the advertising bounty from adding Rutgers added about an incremental $6mm/year to each B1G’s annual disbursement even after accounting for the dilution from Rutgers.

Plus they all get guaranteed wins in football and basketball.  None of them are concerned about strength of schedule given the rest of the conference and their pull.

He laughed when asked if Kansas would be added to the B1G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fowl said:

You couldn’t be more wrong.  A relative of mine is an AD at a P5 school.  I had dinner with him recently and he said the B1G is “overjoyed” at the results of adding Rutgers. The B1G network gets to count every home passed in the tri state area as an “in-network” subscriber to mso’s which more than triples the carriage fee paid by the mso’s in that area.  He estimated that and the advertising bounty from adding Rutgers added about an incremental $6mm/year to each B1G’s annual disbursement even after accounting for the dilution from Rutgers.

Plus they all get guaranteed wins in football and basketball.  None of them are concerned about strength of schedule given the rest of the conference and their pull.

He laughed when asked if Kansas would be added to the B1G.

$6 million each year?  Hmmmm....Just out of curiosity, how many Rutger football players were invited to the NFL Combine? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Fowl said:

You couldn’t be more wrong.  A relative of mine is an AD at a P5 school.  I had dinner with him recently and he said the B1G is “overjoyed” at the results of adding Rutgers. The B1G network gets to count every home passed in the tri state area as an “in-network” subscriber to mso’s which more than triples the carriage fee paid by the mso’s in that area.  He estimated that and the advertising bounty from adding Rutgers added about an incremental $6mm/year to each B1G’s annual disbursement even after accounting for the dilution from Rutgers.

Plus they all get guaranteed wins in football and basketball.  None of them are concerned about strength of schedule given the rest of the conference and their pull.

He laughed when asked if Kansas would be added to the B1G.

I'll defer to you on Rutgers but not on your offensively curt comment about Kansas.

Maybe the B1G will never add another school in which case you will obviously be correct. However, expansion decisions aren't made by ADs but by presidents and even if your relative's laugh reflected the opinion of his or her boss, that campus president is the possessor of simply one of 14 votes and if that person isn't around when expansion is contemplated, zero of 14 votes. Also, rather than dismissing my comment out of hand, kindly explain why YOU believe KU to the B1G makes no sense. Because in MY opinion, viewing KU's attributes in comparison to those of other possible adds makes it among a small handful of likely additions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I'll defer to you on Rutgers but not on your offensively curt comment about Kansas.

Maybe the B1G will never add another school in which case you will obviously be correct. However, expansion decisions aren't made by ADs but by presidents and even if your relative's laugh reflected the opinion of his or her boss, that campus president is the possessor of simply one of 14 votes and if that person isn't around when expansion is contemplated, zero of 14 votes. Also, rather than dismissing my comment out of hand, kindly explain why YOU believe KU to the B1G makes no sense. Because in MY opinion, viewing KU's attributes in comparison to those of other possible adds makes it among a small handful of likely additions.

This is coming from my relative who knows the situation very well and once worked for a school in the Big 12 but I share his sentiment.  Kansas has a population of 2.9mm and maybe a few hundred K more that live in the KC region but reside on the MO side of the border.  The addition of Kansas would be highly diliutive from a tv revenue standpoint.  Not to mention their football program has been the worst in the entire P5 for over a decade (his words "no one cares about basketball").  The marketing studies done by the Big 12 a while back showed that the state is split about 60/40 in terms of support for KU vs KSU so they don't even control the 3mm or so in their state. 

He thinks the B1G wants two of UVA, UNC, BC, and GA Tech as their final two schools.  All are viewed as better academic schools by presidents than KU with far bigger media markets than KU.  They don't want to go past 16 so the last two slots are only going to two schools that really move the needle for them.  He thinks the probability of Texas and OU going to the B1G are very small.  He believes that ultimately Texas, OU, and USC will be the first of the P5 to go independent (particularly USC) given the widening chasm between the revenue from the SEC and B1G versus the Pac.  To maintain relevance with the other big football powers they will need more revenue and their conferences aren't going to provide that to them vs what they could get on their own.  I've said this before as my brother played football at USC and is very tied into the football program, boosters, and athletic department.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tulsa Guy said:

$6 million each year?  Hmmmm....Just out of curiosity, how many Rutger football players were invited to the NFL Combine? 

That has zero impact on how much revenue the B1G generates from passing homes in the NYC area while getting 4x the carriage fee from them without having Rutgers.  It is not hard to understand - greater population in the markets in which you operate = greater revenue from your conference tv network.  Why do you think A&M was added to the SEC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fowl said:

This is coming from my relative who knows the situation very well and once worked for a school in the Big 12 but I share his sentiment.  Kansas has a population of 2.9mm and maybe a few hundred K more that live in the KC region but reside on the MO side of the border.  The addition of Kansas would be highly diliutive from a tv revenue standpoint.  Not to mention their football program has been the worst in the entire P5 for over a decade (his words "no one cares about basketball").  The marketing studies done by the Big 12 a while back showed that the state is split about 60/40 in terms of support for KU vs KSU so they don't even control the 3mm or so in their state. 

He thinks the B1G wants two of UVA, UNC, BC, and GA Tech as their final two schools.  All are viewed as better academic schools by presidents than KU with far bigger media markets than KU.  They don't want to go past 16 so the last two slots are only going to two schools that really move the needle for them.  He thinks the probability of Texas and OU going to the B1G are very small.  He believes that ultimately Texas, OU, and USC will be the first of the P5 to go independent (particularly USC) given the widening chasm between the revenue from the SEC and B1G versus the Pac.  To maintain relevance with the other big football powers they will need more revenue and their conferences aren't going to provide that to them vs what they could get on their own.  I've said this before as my brother played football at USC and is very tied into the football program, boosters, and athletic department.   

I’m sure USC has considered independence; I am also sure the Rams coming home to LA and being very good have made that option less appealing then it was just a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fowl said:

This is coming from my relative who knows the situation very well and once worked for a school in the Big 12 but I share his sentiment.  Kansas has a population of 2.9mm and maybe a few hundred K more that live in the KC region but reside on the MO side of the border.  The addition of Kansas would be highly diliutive from a tv revenue standpoint.  Not to mention their football program has been the worst in the entire P5 for over a decade (his words "no one cares about basketball").  The marketing studies done by the Big 12 a while back showed that the state is split about 60/40 in terms of support for KU vs KSU so they don't even control the 3mm or so in their state. 

He thinks the B1G wants two of UVA, UNC, BC, and GA Tech as their final two schools.  All are viewed as better academic schools by presidents than KU with far bigger media markets than KU.  They don't want to go past 16 so the last two slots are only going to two schools that really move the needle for them.  He thinks the probability of Texas and OU going to the B1G are very small.  He believes that ultimately Texas, OU, and USC will be the first of the P5 to go independent (particularly USC) given the widening chasm between the revenue from the SEC and B1G versus the Pac.  To maintain relevance with the other big football powers they will need more revenue and their conferences aren't going to provide that to them vs what they could get on their own.  I've said this before as my brother played football at USC and is very tied into the football program, boosters, and athletic department.   

So, according to your unnamed source, the most likely changes in conference affiliation in 2025 are by schools who signed a grant of rights through 2035 ?!

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/17102933/acc-espn-agree-20-year-rights-deal-lead-2019-launch-acc-network

Either your source or you are mis-informed or fabricating this story because there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY UVA, UNC, BC and GT leave the ACC without their own media rights.

Maybe your family member is Pat Hayden and he made up this story, but I would presume that as a BYU fan you don't take the stories of old drunks at face value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 4:48 PM, Nickp1991 said:

maybe the AAC should try to get a baseball deal on ESPN+ 

AAC has good baseball and women's hoops that would make great 'filler' for ESPN+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fowl said:

That has zero impact on how much revenue the B1G generates from passing homes in the NYC area while getting 4x the carriage fee from them without having Rutgers.  It is not hard to understand - greater population in the markets in which you operate = greater revenue from your conference tv network.  Why do you think A&M was added to the SEC?

It was not my intent to challenge your very informative post.  Rather, it was my intent to support your post.  In today's college sports, its all about TV money.  The issue is not how good the football team is.  The issue is how many TV viewers do you bring.  My post was a pun, if you will, of the POWER 6 thread on this message board.  Thank you for sharing the information in your posts.  In some of the past B12 media during the crazy realignment days, it was speculated ACC went to 14 teams anticipating losing two more teams to B1G....just like Maryland.  The information in your posts supports that contention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

So, according to your unnamed source, the most likely changes in conference affiliation in 2025 are by schools who signed a grant of rights through 2035 ?!

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/17102933/acc-espn-agree-20-year-rights-deal-lead-2019-launch-acc-network

Either your source or you are mis-informed or fabricating this story because there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY UVA, UNC, BC and GT leave the ACC without their own media rights.

Maybe your family member is Pat Hayden and he made up this story, but I would presume that as a BYU fan you don't take the stories of old drunks at face value.

You don’t think that a negotiated settlement could happen?  What happened when Maryland left the ACC or when Rutgers left the AACor when WVA left the big east?  They sued each other based on their interpretations of the contract and settled on smaller amount than the conference thought they were due. Grants of rights contracts aren’t bulletproof.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 10:58 AM, Fowl said:

You don’t think that a negotiated settlement could happen?  What happened when Maryland left the ACC or when Rutgers left the AACor when WVA left the big east?  They sued each other based on their interpretations of the contract and settled on smaller amount than the conference thought they were due. Grants of rights contracts aren’t bulletproof.  

Both Maryland and West Virginia are examples of where a conference included an exit fee provision in a specific contract.  West Virginia didn't agree with the amount of the Big East/American exit fee  https://www.wvgazettemail.com/sports/big-east-ok-s-higher-exit-fee-with-a-catch/article_f14d3a26-21ac-5e79-a1e3-ab9f2e678590.html and negotiated a settlement based on their lawsuit.  Maryland left the ACC for the Big Ten in 2012, then the ACC expanded and signed a grant of rights with all fifteen current members in 2013 https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/acc-approves-grant-of-rights-deal/

The idea to use a grant of rights instead of relying on conference bylaws arose after the Big East broke up.  Essentially, people realized that an exit fee wasn't much of a disincentive unless it was so high that a school could then successfully argue that the exit fee is really an unconscionable liquidated damages clause (which is a fact specific question given the terms of the contract).

With a grant of rights a school doesn't own its own media rights because they are granted to another entity (the grantee, in this case an athletic conference governed by bylaws the school is a member of) and there is very little incentive for an individual school to switch conferences because that school can't bring their media rights to that new conference.  A school is not prevented from leaving a conference under the conference's bylaws but the conference with the grant of rights would still control how the media contracts worked for the school - even in their new conference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

It was not my intent to challenge your very informative post.  Rather, it was my intent to support your post.  In today's college sports, its all about TV money.  The issue is not how good the football team is.  The issue is how many TV viewers do you bring. 

I don't know if you are simply short-handing what you think or if that is your view. But the statement as bolded is one of the mistakes I think some AAC fans make when discussing media contracts.

Total viewers is a good starting metric but far from the only thing determining total value.

It is a combination of the number of viewers AND their demographics that determines media money. Advertisers drill down into the numbers beyond "how many" to determine what they will pay. The media companies will want to maximize the advertising revenue in each time slot by looking at the type of fan not just the number of fans.

Some people will even shorthand demographics by focusing on only household income or geographic location. But it goes much deeper than those 2 factors in the drill down analysis today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Fowl said:

You don’t think that a negotiated settlement could happen?  What happened when Maryland left the ACC or when Rutgers left the AACor when WVA left the big east?  They sued each other based on their interpretations of the contract and settled on smaller amount than the conference thought they were due. Grants of rights contracts aren’t bulletproof.  

The Big East had a 5 million dollar exit fee and no GOR. They negotiated a 20 million dollar exit fee which was 4 times the amount of the league exit fee The additional 15 million dollar fee was to cover West Virginia leaving the Big East one year early. There was no clause in the Big East contract covering leaving early in terms of monies, however the Rhode Island courts awarded 4 times the stated exit fee of 5 million. Hence negotiated settlements do in fact occur and are by no means rare.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

Both Maryland and West Virginia are examples of where a conference included an exit fee provision in a specific contract.  West Virginia didn't agree with the amount of the Big East/American exit fee  https://www.wvgazettemail.com/sports/big-east-ok-s-higher-exit-fee-with-a-catch/article_f14d3a26-21ac-5e79-a1e3-ab9f2e678590.html and negotiated a settlement based on their lawsuit.  Maryland left the ACC for the Big Ten in 2012, then the ACC expanded and signed a grant of rights with all fifteen current members in 2013 https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/acc-approves-grant-of-rights-deal/

The idea to use a grant of rights instead of relying on conference bylaws arose after the Big East broke up.  Essentially, people realized that an exit fee wasn't much of a disincentive unless it was so high that a school could then successfully argue that the exit fee is really an unconscionable liquidated damages clause (which is a fact specific question given the terms of the contract).

With a grant of rights a school doesn't own its own media rights because they are granted to another entity (the grantee) and there is very little incentive for an individual school to switch conferences because that school can't bring their media rights to that new conference.  A school is not prevented from leaving a conference under the conference's bylaws but the conference with the grant of rights would still control how the media contracts worked for the school - even in their new conference.

Contracts are meant to be broken and bylaws are a form of contract.  If it comes to 2025 and there are 10 years left on the deal perhaps the B1G just buys out the remainder.  It happens frequently.  I've been involved in a few situations where there were contracts in place for a CEO and I took over the company, fired his ass, and never paid anything per the contract because the contract was given to him fraudulently by a board who was hand picked by him and happened to be all of his buddies.  We settled for pennies on the dollar.  It happens all of the time.  

Of course the examples I cited were exit fees.  It is an example of a contract where the two parties disagreed on, and settled for something far less than the conference thought, and argued, it was owed. 

You seem to be very upset over what I have relayed.  If you don't like what you read just ignore it.  I'm just relaying what I was told.  And no I'm not making it up - why would I?  What do I have to gain?  I have more to lose because I divulged confidential info.  He wouldn't be happy if he knew I was telling the world via a public message board what he told me in confidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My irritation is based on failing to understand what a grant of rights is.  First and foremost, a grant of rights is a property interest (like buying a house) where the holding entity has certain rights spelled out in the written instrument that created it.  While there is a writing, that writing isn't a contract because the writing creates a property interest, not a contract.  After a grant of rights is executed, it doesn't matter if a school moves from one conference to another because they aren't violating the terms of the grant of rights by switching conferences.

Yes, contracts are meant to be broken and that is why they are economically useful (theoretically if the parties always get along then a contract isn't necessary) . The ability to pay damages when in breach is why a contract doesn't dissuade schools from changing conferences so the ACC, Pac 12, B1G and Big 12 signed a grant of rights instead.  A grant of rights doesn't prevent schools from switching conferences but it removes the incentive to change because the 'old' conference still controls the media rights of the school.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 12:49 AM, Fowl said:

You couldn’t be more wrong.  A relative of mine is an AD at a P5 school.  I had dinner with him recently and he said the B1G is “overjoyed” at the results of adding Rutgers. The B1G network gets to count every home passed in the tri state area as an “in-network” subscriber to mso’s which more than triples the carriage fee paid by the mso’s in that area.  He estimated that and the advertising bounty from adding Rutgers added about an incremental $6mm/year to each B1G’s annual disbursement even after accounting for the dilution from Rutgers.

Plus they all get guaranteed wins in football and basketball.  None of them are concerned about strength of schedule given the rest of the conference and their pull.

He laughed when asked if Kansas would be added to the B1G.

I always kind of get the feeling that in 50 years, the idea that Rutgers was in the B1G will be treated the same way that the tidbit that Tulane used to be in the SEC will be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still laugh at the notion that schools in big media markets have some inherent value. What value does SJSU bring the MWC? They are in a big media market but no one watches or cares about them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×